Post by monkybunney on Oct 10, 2013 22:18:20 GMT -5

OK I know it's bad etiquette to post the same message to two threads but I was really torn as to which thread to post it in. Please forgive me but I feel this is important.

This is like THE BEST thing ever. This MUST be taken advantage of. All you need is a microphone. It connects you to a random member of congress so you can yell at them And check out the sweet quacking domain name - drunkdialcongress.org/ Seriously you guys we gotta start doing this! I'm not drunk yet but damn if this didn't give me a reason to start drinking tonight!

EDIT: At first I thought it connected you via VOIP over the web but I just tried it and it actually calls you phone than connects you! NICE!

Post by LawnGnome on Oct 16, 2013 19:31:00 GMT -5

Despite the fact that Ted Cruz has enhanced his brand among an extremely small, albeit disproportionately vocal, constituency, my hope is that the Tea Party sham has been exposed to everyone that matters. I'm a Democrat, but a Republican party with a healthy suspicion of the excesses of government is positive thing, as opposed to a Republican party that holds a contempt for all government. I hope this experience reduces the chances for an identical standoff in a few months, though I'm not holding my breath.

Post by Flanz on Oct 17, 2013 6:58:38 GMT -5

Glad to know I'm not the only one here who thinks it'll only get worse from here. These sociopaths just seem to get more and more desperate as time goes on.

I think the fact that the GOP candidates for the next election just took a collective nose-dive in the polls in many tight races is all the incentive these jackals need to fly straight for the near future.

Post by itrainmonkeys on Oct 17, 2013 8:58:13 GMT -5

I've read some people say that many of the GOP members aren't worried about the upcoming elections because their areas/districts are going to re-elect them anyway because of gerrymandering. Any truth to that?

Post by LawnGnome on Oct 17, 2013 9:09:10 GMT -5

I've read some people say that many of the GOP members aren't worried about the upcoming elections because their areas/districts are going to re-elect them anyway because of gerrymandering. Any truth to that?

Just in the Nashville area, I can basically guarantee you that Diane Black and Marsha Blackburn will coast to reelection next year, no problem. In 2012, Black didn't even have a Democratic challenger. The only threat to a lot of representatives in those ruby red districts will come from their right, not their left.

Post by George on Oct 17, 2013 9:20:17 GMT -5

I've read some people say that many of the GOP members aren't worried about the upcoming elections because their areas/districts are going to re-elect them anyway because of gerrymandering. Any truth to that?

Sure. Part of it is due to gerrymandering, but some of these republicans are pushing so hard precisely because they're worried about keeping their seats. Gerrymandering or not, there are a lot of districts that are very much in the red. If a congressman from one of these very right wing districts decides that he's not going to push hard enough to get rid of the ACA, in the primary next year he could get ousted by someone claiming the incumbent isn't far enough to the right.

Post by Dave Maynar on Oct 17, 2013 10:03:06 GMT -5

I've read some people say that many of the GOP members aren't worried about the upcoming elections because their areas/districts are going to re-elect them anyway because of gerrymandering. Any truth to that?

It's not due to gerrymandering, but I would expect the House members from around Knoxville to win easily just because the area has been voting conservative for a good while now.

I do appreciate what McConnell did with working with Reid. In case you didn't know, he is supposedly in for a fight next year against Lundergan Grimes. She was challenging him already before this mess, but she has actually outraised him in her first quarter as the official candidate (link). By working with Reid, McConnell is able to distance himself some from Boehner, Cruz and the lot, and hopefully (for him) become the Republican who came to his senses and made things work. Sure. He let down the far right, but it's not like they are going to vote for a Democrat anyway.

Post by monkybunney on Oct 19, 2013 20:38:08 GMT -5

I...sigh. Just when I think I've heard the most tremendously stupid thing a right wing religious nut can say... If you had posted that quote without a source I'd have laughed thinking it was parody. Poe's law man.

There's been some talk about the Republican party splitting into 2 separate parties because some folks don't think the republican party is conservative enough. Possibly creating a 3rd party. I really really hope this happens. Separate the crazy batshit insane lunatic fringe from the Republicans and I might actually hear what their candidates have to say. Right now I vote straight democrat/independent/libertarian/anything-but-republican in local elections because of people like this guy.

Post by Dave Maynar on Nov 1, 2013 22:03:36 GMT -5

I just so happened to have a work conversation about this come up today. That 3% number really put a damper on the other side. The response I got was "Well, the callers on the radio made it seem like a lot." That's right. Callers on the radio are apparently okay to use as evidence.

For another fun tidbit, this week was when Congress had to decide what part of their staff (if any) stayed on federal insurance and what part went to the new exchanges. As much as "trainwreck" as he said it was, Boehner's entire staff is going to the exchanges.

Post by Launchpad McQuack on Nov 14, 2013 11:35:24 GMT -5

That's going to be some race, if they let Christie passed the primaries that is. I voted for Christie twice and think he's been a great governor, so I would fall into the undecided category if he ran against Hillary.

Post by Flanz on Nov 14, 2013 16:04:51 GMT -5

That's going to be some race, if they let Christie passed the primaries that is. I voted for Christie twice and think he's been a great governor, so I would fall into the undecided category if he ran against Hillary.

Post by Launchpad McQuack on Nov 15, 2013 11:57:47 GMT -5

That's going to be some race, if they let Christie passed the primaries that is. I voted for Christie twice and think he's been a great governor, so I would fall into the undecided category if he ran against Hillary.

So you don't care about his horrific handling of economics in NJ?

Are you referring to the hypocrisy of telling state workers that times are tough and they have to sacrifice while giving tax cuts to the wealthy? Every Republican unfortunately believes in that trickle down nonsense. I don't. But I think my state is unquestionably better off economically now, then it was under Jon Corzine who really left us in a horrific situation. He entered office with a huge deficit (much like the one the federal government finds itself in now) and has reigned in unnecessary spending, while also offering the largest budget my state has ever had for education, and every legislation he has ever passed while in office has been a bipartisan effort (which is something Washington sorely needs). I worry about what his foreign policy plans are, but he's been a pretty great manager for my state and I think he has the ability to be one for the country. Hillary is another politician I don't 100% agree with, but admire and think could be great for the country. I hope the 2016 election is between these two, because it would be a substantive debate, and I genuinely believe no matter the outcome the country would have a competent leader who knows how to govern.

Post by Flanz on Nov 15, 2013 12:12:34 GMT -5

Are you referring to the hypocrisy of telling state workers that times are tough and they have to sacrifice while giving tax cuts to the wealthy? Every Republican unfortunately believes in that trickle down nonsense. I don't. But I think my state is unquestionably better off economically now, then it was under Jon Corzine who really left us in a horrific situation. He entered office with a huge deficit (much like the one the federal government finds itself in now) and has reigned in unnecessary spending, while also offering the largest budget my state has ever had for education, and every legislation he has ever passed while in office has been a bipartisan effort (which is something Washington sorely needs). I worry about what his foreign policy plans are, but he's been a pretty great manager for my state and I think he has the ability to be one for the country. Hillary is another politician I don't 100% agree with, but admire and think could be great for the country. I hope the 2016 election is between these two, because it would be a substantive debate, and I genuinely believe no matter the outcome the country would have a competent leader who knows how to govern.

Christie's state has lagged behind 4/5's of the country in every major indicator. Employment, wages, tax revenue? All increased under Christie, and all gains put them 44th or worse in state rankings. The value of publicly traded companies in NJ grew the 3rd lowest amount in the country since he took office.

I've gotten into this discussion before (with Jimmy aka Werther), but Christie is NOT good for the economy, state or federal. He has positives, but the economy is definitely not among them.

Also, I remember when Jimmy went on and on about "balanced" budgets, and I brought up that simple accounting tricks were in play and they were in no way, shape or form balanced. Well...

"A hard truth Christie absolutely will not tell is that every one of his budgets has been unbalanced by more than $2.5 billion," notes Bloomberg news blogger Josh Barro, citing Christie's bad habit -- started by previous governors -- of skimping on payments into the state's pension fund.

I think you should do some research on Christie, he's got some good ideas, he has a lot of charisma, he does work with democrats (and in this ridiculous state our society currently resides in, that's a compliment...I guess), but he has no experience dealing with the international community and has a terrible track record on the economy. I expect him to get torn to pieces during the primary season and if he survives that and gets the nod, I don't think he can win.

Post by sleepy on Nov 15, 2013 12:59:59 GMT -5

He also has absolutely zero experience in Washington, which could come back to bite him in the ass. That may let him paint himself as being different from most Republicans for the time being, but I think his inexperience at the federal level won't sit well with a lot of people - in part because of the inexperience itself, and in part because it's difficult to tell where he really stands.

His true colours will show once he has to first appeal to more conservative voters in the primaries, and then more moderate ones in the general election. I predict he'll probably succumb to a lot of the same pitfalls that Romney did in that regard.